As the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy approaches, JFK remains a mythical figure for left-liberals. But they’re wrong to call him the standard bearer of their principles, because though Kennedy had some liberal characteristics he would hardly recognize the Democratic Party as it is currently constructed. Here are five liberal myths about the 35th president.

1) JFK was a Ted Kennedy clone.

Liberals today are understood to stand for the opposite of everything Republicans stand for, but the labels were more fluid in the JFK era, when some Republicans were liberal and some Democrats were conservative. In 1953, shortly after being elected to the Senate, Kennedy said, “I’d be very happy to tell them I’m not a liberal….I’m not comfortable with those people.” In the 1960 “I’m a liberal speech” Democrats often cite, Kennedy sounded more like a compassionate conservative:

If, by “liberal,” [our opponents] mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrates that we are not that kind of “liberal.” But if, by a “liberal,” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people….if that is what they mean by a “liberal,” then I’m proud to say that I’m a “liberal.”

I must say, that although I don't believe JFK was a true conservative (liberal and conservative had some different meanings back then) I would take a JFK over what we have in the White House right now in a HEARTBEAT. The man was far more a patriot and compassionate person than what exists there now.

He is the type of Democrat that I could "agree to disagree" with know that in spite of that he still genuinely cared about the well being of the country.

If the truth be known, the only people who remain fascinated with Camelot are aging Boomers. Ask a 28 year old about JFK and he would not know who you are talking about. Scholarship since the late 1980s uncovered just how much the entire Kennedy family was the result of the efforts of old man Joe Kennedy and the Beltway media establishment.

Few people know much about JFK because few people even care about him and his "legacy". Like Kurt Cobain and Jimmy Hendrix, JFK was far more popular dead than alive.

As Mark Steyn has noted, a couple of weeks before JFK's assassination in Dallas, the South Vietnamese leader was assassinated in Seoul... with the OK if not an actual letter, from JFK.

And then, there was his successful efforts to strong arm Canada into a tighter (and submissive) alliance with the USA. JFK did not like the then Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker, and interfered with Canada's elections in 1960s. I had no idea that this was a fact. And yes, it irritates me a LOT.

The article makes a good point that JFK was much more conservative than todays dems, and definitely more conservative than his brother Teddy. It explains why Reagan often was wiling to praise JFK. People often remark that todays repub party is much more conservative, but the reverse is also true, todays dems are far more leftist.

Another exercise in ignorance and stupidity. JFK was one of the architects of the Great society, LBJ, just finished the task. JFK had nothing to do with Vietnam?, now guess who ordered the assassination of South Vietnam's President Diem? JFK was such a degenerate he was having sexual affairs with mob molls and Soviet spies. JFK also got daddy to put the fix in for his silver star in WW II, a tactic later employed by John Kerry. It's a shame so many so called conservatives are enamoured with the "Christ figure" propaganda about this failed President.

A tag for the flavour of the month decided by those in the club of the policy echelons in ALL the civic institutions? Anything that floats the boat for people who above all things covet power? Power over "The Lives of Others".

To accept their words and meanings in public discourse surrenders a priori the public arena to them and their world views.

WITHOUT demanding DETAILS - the Devil IS IN the detail - at the outset of motives, means and opportunities for that PLANNED CHANGE.

OUTED in no uncertain terms as FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION Of the Nation" by their "New Kennedy/Messiah" as saviour of their political agenda. THAT nation as "community" based on a social contract that sustains and protects the Lives of Others from intrusion by government agents and or agencies into decisions in their private lives.

"Left Liberals" Reminiscent of the triumphalist launching by the then USSR of their Sputnik in 1957. Referenced recently by their Saviour/Messiah/New Kennedy BH Obama as his "Sputnik Moment", whatever he meant by that.

Power to control "The Lives of Others". As WMD the money, donated, or forced (taxes), FROM the people they intend to control by their self appointed, self propagating, incestuous "Left Liberal" commissariates.

Their mantra relentlessly repeated and universally propagated by their "soldiers"/Mad or more appropiately Made Men. "For the Good of the People". "Winning" "the hearts and minds" of the people over whom they'll assert that power.

Transformation of the foundation of the nation, the "pillars of the city".

The CONSTITUTiON. THE character, the make-up, the IDENTITY of the People of the nation of WE The Peoplle. NOT the government members of which act ONLY as reprsentative of WE - ALL - The People.

You missed the biggest liberal myth about JFK: the claims that everyone knew about his sexual escapades while he was in office, and nobody cared. This huge lie gained its greatest currency during the Clinton years to inoculate the Arkansas lecher against the sex scandals that began with Gennifer Flowers and culminated (for now) with Monica Lewinsky.

In actuality, when word of JFK's bedroom exploits began trickling out in the '70s, it was so shocking most people refused to believe the tales and considered them slanderous. Had his whoring around become public during his term, he might not have been able to to be re-nominated in 1964, let alone win re-election.

The myth is that Kennedy was a great President. Not so. He started out muffing the Bay of Pigs, followed by the disastrous Vienna Summit where he confirmed Khrushchev's view of him as a weak rich boy whose election was due to his Daddy's money.

This impression gave rise to the Berlin Wall and the Cuban Missile Crisis. He recognized his credibility problem and decided that Vietnam was the place to regain it.

Even on Civil Rights he was not in the forefront. In Oct 1962 he badly fumbled the desegregation of Ole Miss by sending in unarmed "monitors" instead of armed troops. He later had to activated the National Guard as well as various Federal law enforcement after a riot started.

He then sat on his hands until forced to by MLK jrs Birmingham letters and George Wallace's Stand in the Schoolhouse Door. He had to again Federalize the National Guard and sent them to U of Alabama to remove Wallace.

Most of his accomplishments were postmortem when LBJ used his assassination as pretext to pass a lot of legislation and escalate the Vietnam War.

Actually we would have been much better off had Nixon taken office in 1961 rather than 1968. The Cold Was would have been a lot different since Khrushchev knew Nixon well and would never have tried to bluff him. Arguably the whole Vietnam War might never have happened but for Kennedy as well.

I must say, that although I don't believe JFK was a true conservative (liberal and conservative had some different meanings back then) I would take a JFK over what we have in the White House right now in a HEARTBEAT. The man was far more a patriot and compassionate person than what exists there now.

He is the type of Democrat that I could "agree to disagree" with know that in spite of that he still genuinely cared about the well being of the country.

This gets argued back and forth, the idea that Joe Kennedy was a bootlegger. That would have put him in bed with the mafia, but of course pretty much everyone who was anyone drank illegal booze at some point, and didn't ask where it came from or who imported it. The other (more plausible) story is that Joe K. spent most of the '20s buying and selling stocks, and engaging in all sorts of what we would now call "insider trading." It wasn't illegal then, but when FDR got elected he put Joe in charge of the SEC, and Joe put a lot of people in jail, most for doing things he'd done himself a few years before. He knew all the tricks, you see.